Advertisement

Large-Scale Elastic Load Management Under Auction Games

  • Zhongjing MaEmail author
  • Suli Zou
Chapter
  • 9 Downloads

Abstract

Auctions, e.g., market clearing price (MCP) auctions, have been widely adopted in electricity markets, and progressive second price (PSP) auctions are stated possessing promising properties of incentive compatibility and efficiency. In this work, we study the coordination of large-scale elastic loads in deregulated electricity markets under MCP and PSP auctions. To explore the performances of these auctions in the underlying problems, we focus on key issues of the payment comparison, incentive compatibility, and efficiency of Nash equilibrium (NE), and develop the following results: (i) The individual payment under MCP is always higher than that under PSP, and their difference vanishes asymptotically as the system scale increases; (ii) The incentive compatibility holds under PSP, and holds under MCP only with respect to others’ efficient bid profile; (iii) The efficient bid profile under PSP auctions is a NE, while that under MCP is an \(\varepsilon \)-NE which degenerates to a NE asymptotically as the system scale increases. With these analyses, we claim that it is pretty promising to apply both MCP and PSP auctions to the large-scale load coordination problems in deregulated electricity markets.

Supplementary material

References

  1. 1.
    F.E. Banks, Economics of electricity deregulation and privatization: an introductory survey. Energy 21(4), 249–261 (1996)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Y.R. Sood, N.P. Padhy, H.O. Gupta, Wheeling of power under deregulated environment of power system: a bibliographical survey. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 17(3), 870–878 (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A.G. Kagiannas, D.T. Askounis, J. Psarras, Power generation planning: a survey from monopoly to competition. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 26(6), 413–421 (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J.H. Williams, F. Kahrl, Electricity reform and sustainable development in China. Environ. Res. Lett. 3(4), 044009 (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    X. Zhao, C. Ma, Deregulation, vertical unbundling and the performance of China’s large coal-fired power plants. Energy Econ. 40, 474–483 (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    G. Li, J. Shi, Agent-based modeling for trading wind power with uncertainty in the day-ahead wholesale electricity markets of single-sided auctions. Appl. Energy 99, 13–22 (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    L. Gan, U. Topcu, S.H. Low, Optimal decentralized protocol for electric vehicle charging. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 28(2), 940–951 (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Z.Y. Xu, W.S. Xu, W.H. Shao, Z.Y. Zeng, Real-time pricing control on generation-side: optimal demand-tracking model and information fusion estimation solver. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 29(4), 1522–1535 (2014)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    M.H. Albadi, E.F. El-Saadany, A summary of demand response in electricity markets. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 78(11), 1989–1996 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    H.A. Aalami, M.P. Moghaddam, G.R. Yousefi, Modeling and prioritizing demand response programs in power markets. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 80(4), 426–435 (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    S. Cha, T. Reen, N. Hah, Optimal charging strategies of electric vehicles in the UK power market, in 1st Conference on Innovative Smart Grid Technologies, pp. 1–8, Gaithersburg, Maryland, 19–21 January 2010Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    D. Callaway, I. Hiskens, Achieving controllability of electric loads. Proc. IEEE 99(1), 184–199 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    K.S. Vitae, L.B. Lave, Demand response and electricity market efficiency. Electr. J. 20(3), 69–85 (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    K. Dietrich, J.M. Latorre, L. Olmos, A. Ramos, Demand response and its sensitivity to participation rates and elasticities, in 8th International Conference on the European Energy Market (EEM), pp. 717–716, Zagreb, Croatia, 25–27 May 2011Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    A.K. Singh, Smart grid dynamic pricing. Int. J. Eng. Res. Appl. (IJERA) 2–6, 705–742 (2012)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Z. Ma, D. Callaway, I. Hiskens, Decentralized charging control of large populations of plug-in electric vehicles. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 21(1), 67–78 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    N. Fabra, N. Von der Fehr, D. Harbord, Modeling electricity auctions. Electr. J. 15(7), 72–81 (2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    K. Abbink, J. Brandts, P. Pezanis-Christou, Auctions for government securities: a laboratory comparison of uniform, discriminatory and Spanish designs. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 61(2), 284–303 (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    T.S. Genc, Discriminatory versus uniform-price electricity auctions with supply function equilibrium. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 140(1), 9–31 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    S. Nielsen, P. Sorknaes, P.A. Ostergaard, Electricity market auction settings in a future Danish electricity system with a high penetration of renewable energy sources a comparison of marginal pricing and pay-as-bid. Energy 36(7), 4434–4444 (2011)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    P. Klemperer, Auction theory: a guide to the literature. J. Econ. Surv. 13(3), 227–286 (1999)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    V. Krishna, Auction Theory (Academic, New York, 2009)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    F. Wen, A.K. David, Optimal bidding strategies and modeling of imperfect information among competitive generators. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 16(1), 15–21 (2001)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    L. Ausubel, P. Cramton, Demand reduction and inefficiency in multi-unit auctions. Working papers, University of Maryland, 2002Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    A. Lazar, N. Semret, Design and analysis of the progressive second price auction for network bandwidth sharing. Telecommun. Syst. 13, (2001)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    P. Maillé, B. Tuffin, The progressive second price mechanism in a stochastic environment. Netnomics 5(2), 119–147 (2003)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    R. Jain, J. Walrand, An efficient Nash-implementation mechanism for network resource allocation. Automatica 46, 1276–1283 (2010)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    O. Marce, H.-H. Tran, B. Tuffin, Double-sided auctions applied to vertical handover for mobility management in wireless networks. J. Netw. Syst. Manag. 22(4), 658–681 (2014)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    S. Zou, Z. Ma, X. Liu, Auction-based distributed efficient economic operations of microgrid systems. Int. J. Control 87(12), 2446–2462 (2014)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    P. Jia, P. Caines, Analysis of quantized double auctions with application to competitive electricity markets. INFOR: Inf. Syst. Oper. Res. 48(4), 239–250 (2010)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    E. Bompard, Y. Ma, R. Napoli, G. Abrate, The demand elasticity impacts on the strategic bidding behavior of the electricity producers. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 22(1), 188–197 (2007)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    V.P. Gountis, A.G. Bakirtzis, Bidding strategies for electricity producers in a competitive electricity marketplace. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 19(1), 356–365 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    D.S. Kirschen, Demand-side view of electricity markets. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 18(2), 520–527 (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of AutomationBeijing Institute of TechnologyBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations